Has physics become cool again?

The BBC is running a story Has physics become cool again?. While the overall story is good news, that the number of people people doing A-Level physics in the UK is on the way up, it also high-lights what I see as a big problem, basically the media's portrayal of physicists.

Not to mention Nerds FC. In fact, each year we get an email circulating around our physics department that Beauty and the Geek are looking for new contestants, but from physics they are only looking for geeks, not beauties.

Harmless fun you may say. But is it? We moan about falling numbers in science, and in physics, the number of women in science is a continual source of concern. We know that the teaching of science in school can be problematic, being too boring or too much work, but what message does the above send to kids?

(Pop psych warning) My feeling is that they say that to be a scientist, you must wear the geek/nerd badge. That you must be "uncool". No wonder young people would rather be lawyers or accountants (are there Big Bang Theory equivalents of these?). The portrayal of women in Beauty and the Geek is not particularly flattering either.

The BBC article continues with some mixed messages, with the "Cox Effect" (who can coolly stare from a mountain top in some remote location while make a deep comment about the Universe) inspiring a new generation of physicists. But there is also there is a comment from the excellent Professor Jim Al-Khalili (he of the fantastic Atom tv-series) apparently stating

a football tragic and very un-geeky passtime. I wonder if he means other people are geeks?

In truth, physicists are people who do physics. A look at the lives of physicists reveals the same angsts, woes, joy and excitement as most other people. It doesn't take a lot of detective work to find out the very human activities of Schrodinger and Feynman (or even Einstein for that matter), as well as the tragedies in the lives of Boltzmann, Curie and Ehrenfest. They were people, doing physicsy things, but living peopley lives.

I'm not saying that there are not some nerdy and geeky people in science - there are. But there are nerdy and geeky people in all professions and walks of society, and there are very non-geeky and non-nerdy people in science (such as Cox and Al-Khalili). So, here's the new slogan:

and let's have a few more positive portrayals of physics in the media, doing the kind of things that we do best (like calculating the influence of evolving dark energy on the recent expansion history of the Universe), while hosting cool and sophisticated cocktail parties (well, perhaps at least a fun BBQ and a game of triv). Maybe this will have a positive influence on young people considering a career in science?

I'll finish on a footnote; in a couple of weeks, I will be attending Speed Meet a Geek in the city. When invited to participate, I said I was not interested due to the geek label (which, apparently, is a term of endearment rather than derision), and now my invite says I will be at Speed Meet a Scientist. However, it's still being advertised as Speed Meet a Geek to the kids; Sigh, I'll be sure to wear my polyester trousers, brush up on my Star Trek trivia, and bring some Spiderman comics along......

Comments

A long time ago, when I was a wee lad, I watched reruns of the television series Gilligan's Island: Gilligan, the Skipper too, the millionaire, and his wife, the movie star, the Professor and Mary Ann. Interestingly, the Professor (supposedly modeled on Feynman) was the only realistic character. OK, there was some license made for it being a comedy, but he was much more realistic than the other figures, who were really just types.

Most scientists of course don't correspond to the geeky stereotype. Most are just more or less normal folk, but there are a few real characters such as Einstein, Feynman, Carl Sagan (his description of taking a shower with his wife while high on pot is a classic), Tycho Brahe etc.

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Proton: a life story by Geraint F. Lewis1035 years: I’ve lived a long and eventful life, but I
know that death is almost upon me. Around me, my kind are slowly melting into
the darkness that is now the universe, and my time will eventually come. I’ve lived a long and
eventful life…

10-43 seconds: A time of unbelievable light, unbelievable
heat! I don’t remember the time before I was born, but I was there,
disembodied, ethereal, part of the swirling, roaring fires of the universe coming
in to being. But the universe cooled. From the featureless
inferno, its character crystalized into a seething sea of particles and forces.
Electrons and quarks tore about, smashing and crashing into photons and
neutrinos. The universe continued to cool. 1 second: The intensity of the heat steadily died away, and I was born. In
truth, there was no precise moment of my birth, but as the universe cooled my
innards, free quarks, bound together, and I was suddenly there! A proton! But my existence seemed fleet…

I hate starting every blog post with an apology as I have been busy, but I have. But I have. Teaching Electromagnetism to our first year class, computational physics using MatLab, and six smart talented students to wrangle, takes up a lot of time.

But I continue to try and learn a new thing every day! And so here's a short summary of what I've been doing recently.

There's no secret I love maths. I'm not skilled enough to be a mathematician, but I am an avid user. One of the things I love about maths is its shock value. What, I hear you say, shock? Yes, shock.

I remember when I discovered that trigonometric functions can be written as infinite series, and finding you can calculate these series numerically on a computer by adding the terms together, getting more and more accurate as we add higher terms.

And then there is Fourier Series! The fact that you can add these trigonometric functions together, appropriately weighted, to make other functions, functions that look …

A little look down the comments tho, and we see several claims that what Derek says is not correct. Here's a little excerpt
Well, as a cosmologist, I was surprised to read that the Hubble Sphere is an "outdated concept" having seen it used in a professional meeting last week. But let's take a look at the other claims that are made by "fullyawakened" - I must admit they have the lead on me as I am partiallyjetlagged at the moment. As ever, I am going to steal Tamara Davis's standard cosmological picture in a few different sets of coordinates to do this. I've explained these before, but the top one has distance as we know it along the x-axis, and time as we experience it up the y-axis.

"Our observable Universe is getting smaller" is simply wrong. Let's look at the bottom figure, which is i…